DPP not saving sharpness

108vc wrote in post #11655506
I am just doing "convert and save" and then opening in Lightroom or PS5

It didn't used to do this until just recently

I can't post a RAW file on here to show the comparison

It is working fine for me.

One thing I would suggest is to double check the files that you are viewing to make sure that the one you are looking at is in fact the file you just saved in DPP. (I know sometime I find that some programs save files, by default, in a different directory than where I think they are saving.. and that causes me to look at an older version of a file, using different software, in the directory where I thought I just saved).

And, when all else fails (since you indicate that it was working, then the behavior broke) try a complete uninstall and reinstall.

hairy_moth wrote in post #11657318
It is working fine for me.

One thing I would suggest is to double check the files that you are viewing to make sure that the one you are looking at is in fact the file you just saved in DPP. (I know sometime I find that some programs save files, by default, in a different directory than where I think they are saving.. and that causes me to look at an older version of a file, using different software, in the directory where I thought I just saved).

And, when all else fails (since you indicate that it was working, then the behavior broke) try a complete uninstall and reinstall.

yes, I did that...with a new DPP cd that I got with my 5DM2

grrrr...this is annoying

108vc wrote in post #11658370
yes, I did that...with a new DPP cd that I got with my 5DM2

Do you have the latest copy.. I downloaded v3.9.3.0 from the Canon site a few weeks ago.

hairy_moth wrote in post #11658410
Do you have the latest copy.. I downloaded v3.9.3.0 from the Canon site a few weeks ago.

I am not sure, I will check when I get home and report back

do you have a link to the newest version?

thanks

Downloaded the latest one and still doing it

I have yet to see a screenshot at 100% view confirming that there actually is a problem

tzalman wrote in post #11657118
There is another common user error that causes a discrepancy between RAW preview and jpg. It involves noise reduction. DPP by default reads and applies whatever HINR you have set in your camera. However, it applies it only to the output image unless you click on the "Apply" button on the third tab, which causes the NR to be applied to the preview. So unless you are aware of this, you can be applying a load of Luminance NR, which destroys sharpness, without knowing it. The remedy is to go into Preferences/Tool Palette and change 'Default noise reduction settings' to 'Set as default' and bring both sliders down to zero.

Very good point.

macroimage wrote in post #11656510
A better solution is to use little or no sharpening in DPP unless you are planning to use the output at full size only, like to use for a print.

A better solution is to judge sharpness at 100% and not resize in DPP.
DPP does no output sharpening (output size dependant), so if you resize an image, you need to sharpen afterward anyway.

René Damkot wrote in post #11661212
I have yet to see a screenshot at 100% view confirming that there actually is a problem

so I did this, and at 100% it doesn't really look any different...so I am confused...why does it look much sharper on the below one

Left Raw, Right JPEG
http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …65203631_e77f9a​5ac8_o.png


Left Raw, Right JPEG
http://farm6.static.fl​ickr.com …65817522_9b720c​5b4e_o.png

The JPEG "convert and save" one, looks less sharp than the unedited RAW one that is in my IPhoto

It only *looks* less sharp. Either DPP is showing an oversharpened preview of the CR2 and/or the software shows the jpg too soft at "fit to size".

Trust the 100% view.

If you want to sharpen for web, downsize, then look at the image again, and sharpen as needed. (You'll be looking at 100% then anyway)

Two common misconceptions:
1. That there is such a thing as "unedited RAW". A RAW file is not a color image file; there is never anything that can be seen on a monitor without either conversion and at least default editing or no conversion (because the application is incapable of it) and display of the jpg created and embedded by the camera. I'm not familiar with iPhoto, but I suspect it is doing the latter.
2. That you are seeing what is really in the image file (jpg, tif, or psd) at anything less than 100% zoom. Every application has its own downsizing algorithms. Each one makes its own determination of how much quality to sacrifice for speed. Each one decides how much sharpening to do to compensate for the loss of sharpening caused by downsizing. "Fit to screen" resizing is particularly complex because the percentage is usually an inconvenient number, like 17% or 29%. Some applications cope better than others. In DPP, because RAW preview display and jpg display involve different data flows, "fit to screen" displays can be different even within the same application.

tzalman wrote in post #11664077
Two common misconceptions:
1. That there is such a thing as "unedited RAW". A RAW file is not a color image file; there is never anything that can be seen on a monitor without either conversion and at least default editing or no conversion (because the application is incapable of it) and display of the jpg created and embedded by the camera. I'm not familiar with iPhoto, but I suspect it is doing the latter.
2. That you are seeing what is really in the image file (jpg, tif, or psd) at anything less than 100% zoom. Every application has its own downsizing algorithms. Each one makes its own determination of how much quality to sacrifice for speed. Each one decides how much sharpening to do to compensate for the loss of sharpening caused by downsizing. "Fit to screen" resizing is particularly complex because the percentage is usually an inconvenient number, like 17% or 29%. Some applications cope better than others. In DPP, because RAW preview display and jpg display involve different data flows, "fit to screen" displays can be different even within the same application.

That is the way I take it. Since the embedded JPEG is then displayed 'as is' (ignore everythiing but size), any change to shaspness must be different, because the embedded image (RAW) is always smaller than the file you output, thus any sharpening will not be the same on a side by side comparison.

I tend to use only a very light sharpen anyway, but only finally sharpen if needed on the outputted TIFF/JPEG, depending on how it looks. It's that which matters, not the RAW surely?

so am I imagining that this wasn't happening before?

Maybe. Or you had a (slightly) different monitor (or DPP window) size before?

That's the problem with "size to fit": The scaling (and quality / trustworthiness) depends on the window size.

René Damkot wrote in post #11666629
Maybe. Or you had a (slightly) different monitor (or DPP window) size before?

That's the problem with "size to fit": The scaling (and quality / trustworthiness) depends on the window size.

in viewing these, it seems I am not doing so well as shooting a sharp eye